In a contempt case challenging an interim order in a writ petition regarding university appointments, the court held that the qualification issue warrants consideration in the writ petition itself and closed the contempt proceedings.
This contempt case is closed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA
TUESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018 / 8TH PHALGUNA, 1939
Con.Case(C).No. 359 of 2018
A GAINST THE ORDER IN W.P.(C)NO. 10999 OF 2014, DATED 05.01.2018
PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER IN W.P.(C):
C.GOPINATHAN, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O.MADHAVA MENON, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENT OF BIOTECHNOLOGY, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, RESIDING AT NAVAMI, EAST HILL, CALICUT.
BY ADVS.SRI.V.V.SURENDRAN
SRI.P.A.HARISH
RESPONDENT(S)/1ST RESPONDENT IN W.P.(C):
DR.T.A.ABDUL MAJEED, AGED 49 YEARS,
FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN, REGISTRAR, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, CALICUT UNIVERSITY POST, TENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM, 673 635.
BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, S.C
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27-02-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Msd. 28/02/2018
Con.Case(C).No. 359 of 2018
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES :
ANNEXURE A1: A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE UNIVERSITY DATED 29.08.2017
ANNEXURE A2: THE INTERIM ORDER PASSED BY THIS HONOURABLE COURT DATED 05.01.2018.
ANNEXURE A3: A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 29.01.2018 MADE BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES :
NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.S.TO JUDGE
Msd. 28/02/2018
P.V.ASHA J.
------------------------------------Contempt Case (C).No.359 of 2018
------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of February, 2018
JUDGMENT
The learned Standing Counsel for the
respondent submits that the 3rd respondent in the writ petition is having the prescribed qualification.
In the above circumstances, I am of the view
that the issue is to be considered in the writ petition.
Therefore, this contempt case is closed.
Sd/-
P.V.ASHA, JUDGE.
ww
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the contempt case should be concluded and referred back to the writ petition for consideration of qualification issues.
C.GOPINATHAN
DR.T.A.ABDUL MAJEED
P.V.ASHA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
